Thread 717195981

>not autistic enough to enjoy this
feels bad

>>717195981 (OP)
Rule number six took me too long.
I might be retarded.

>>717196320
join the club fren. how far in have you made it?

>>717196548
Just started playing two hours ago and I'm at 8 now, but I gotta go to sleep soon. It's not like trying to solve these puzzles would get easier if I'm tired.

I can't get past most of the puzzles without at least one guess. I'd love to see someone make a step by step guide on all the deductions because I really think there has to be some guessing or thinking two or three steps ahead before making a move.

>>717198034
I would say about half the puzzles are approachable enough that you can deduce the solution from beginning to end, but the other half require your first few moves to be so logically sound within the game’s systems that it seems unlikely anyone other than the most spergy savants would actually be able to identify them, so you might as well just make inferences and use the hint system to check if you’re going wildly off track

>>717195981 (OP)
>"professional" media critic attempts to make a piece of media themselves
>it's always completely underwhelming and shit

Literally every time. It's like a curse.

Half way through 4th row after 18 hours. I might be retarded, but at least I'm never guessing.

>>717195981 (OP)
Made it to level 13 on a flight but I haven't picked it back up since then. It's like nonograms/picross on steroids so far, very fun but I like the mindless deductive reasoning in picross a bit more. This one actually makes me stop and think too much.

>>717198034
The tricky part is that 'you shouldn't need to guess' doesn't preclude things like
>I can't place this here, because that would force me to place a wall here, which then means this column doesn't have enough spaces for its walls

I'm on row eight and I'm still surprised how often the 1 zone rule plays into solutions.

>>717195981 (OP)
>>not autistic enough to enjoy this
had the same realization with baba is you

>>717200787
That isn't guessing, it's deductive reasoning.

I made it to the last row and I think I may have hit my limit, but then I thought that for a lot of the puzzles on the second to last row and then solved them an hour or two later so who knows

>>717201843
Yeah but people who can't think that many steps ahead see it as guessing

I really wish Matthew wasn't this autistic with the whole "I want to make a game for the GameBoy" thing and just made it for the pc. He could've than put more effort into the visuals and QoL, who knows, maybe we could've even had some music.

>>717201843
True, but for someone who can't do the steps of that purely in their head and is actually placing marks on the board until they find out something doesn't work, that's indistinguishable from guessing.

>>717202571
*then he could've

>>717200787
I consider that a guess because you're considering a tile that you have no reason to consider specifically, and think ahead from there. Sure, they can be pretty educated guesses based on patterns and intuition but it's still a guess.

>>717202571
Unless it were ambient, I think adding music would be the wrong move. So much of the game is just staring at the screen and trying to work something out, having a ditty play on loop in the background would probably make the whole experience more frustrating.

>>717203872
How far into the game are you?

What distinguishes deducing from trying one of a few viable next moves you've found and seeing where it leads?

>>717205250
If you have to guess, it's not really a deduction.

>>717205250
One doesn't require you to actually place the item to check it, you can deduce just from a mental image.

>>717205334
Not an answer
>>717205376
I thought that too, but conceptually why should they be different? If you're going through what is essentially 'trial and error' mentally, why is that more valid than trying the exact same ideas but by using the board?

>>717205250
>viable
If it were truly deductive, there would be no ambiguity, you would know. What you’re describing is inference.

>>717204309
I only just unlocked the third row.

>>717205542
Would you say that any line of thought that starts with 'If this were the case' is not deduction? That's the pattern you go through a lot in this game
>this row can have a wall in two places
>IF it's in this place, it would create an invalid zone, so it cannot be in that place
It feels like deduction, but I'm not familiar with the more precise definition you imply.

>>717205686
Then you really should reconsider your definition of guessing or won't be solving any of the later puzzles.

>>717206515
I don't care about the definition so much as I don't find it very fun or satisfying.

>>717205860
Personally I don't have a problem with that 'single-step ahead' type deduction. That creates the binary situation that I assume most people refer to as 'pure' deduction i.e. any time you have a single space between 2 bombs that needs to walled off or the like. If every puzzle was a single chain of those binary solutions then their wouldn't really be any actual problem solving at work, right?

>>717207334
I don't have a problem with them either, I'm just wondering at what point it's not longer deduction. Some people say it's when you can no longer do it all in your head, but that implies whether something is deducible depends on someone's mental abilities, rather than being a quality of the problem itself. I'm solving the puzzles either way, whatever it's called, but at times you need to follow quite a few mental 'try' steps to exclude a move.

>>717199114
>critiquing media he's not smart enough to properly engage with
never change /v/

>>717207667
>whether something is deducible depends on someone's mental abilities, rather than being a quality of the problem itself
How about both? At some point it isn't deductible, like 3 equations with 4 unknowns but up to that point it's just increasing difficulty.

>>717199114
>Truffaut
>Shrader
>Bogdanovich
>Godard
It used to work pretty well for film makers.

>>717207667
But there’s only one solution for these puzzles right? So there are really no “if”s in the game… technically speaking you should theoretically be able to know with certainty whether a space is a wall or not without having to “try” anything.

>>717207986
But there are if's, e.g. >>717205860. To decide what the next (correct) move must be (since there is indeed only one ultimate solution), you have to evaluate more than one option. Evaluating an option is following an 'if'.

>>717207986
Can you tell me which space I can fill in next using only the rule stated (+ the requirement to mark each cell wall/empty) and give your precise reasoning? Note that you cannot use arguments like
>[space] needs to be empty because it's in a 0 row/column
because that's not the rule or
>[space] needs to be empty/a wall because if not then it breaks the rule
because of that icky "if".

>>717195981 (OP)
>matthew posting about his shit game again

Literally nothing special about this game. GTK even made a better game that was more ambitious.